Our new WSOP Main Event Champ

[Reel Deal]

This guy needs to be trotted out in front of Congress to show that poker players aren't just a bunch of degenerate gamblers. A 39 year old humble, family man that will be sending a lot of his winnings to some high profile charities sounds like the perfect poster child for getting Barney's bill passed.

[Kurn]

This can't do anything but help, though I still oppose the Frank bill absent a change in the tax code that allows the netting of wins-losses. Without that, legailization will have the result of chasing many more casual players away than the UIGEA did.

[melioris]

in the pre-final table interview the question was "What is more important to you, the bracelet or the money?"

His answer (paraphrased) -"The money. You can do a lot of good with the money and that is what I plan on doing."

That is an awesome answer. This guy appears to be a class-act. He is not pretending to be a great poker player. Sure, he luck-boxed some hands at the final table, but he took the second shortest stack at the final table and played aggressive poker.

So far I haven't seen a thing about this guy that isn't positive.

edit to add-the "God" stuff is a little much. If God actually helped him win I am going to be pissed, with all the crap going on in the world right now and all......

[Talking Poker]

Agreed, all around. He's a little (a lot?) overboard with the God stuff, but to each their own. He seems like a genuinely nice guy, at least. He certainly wasn't the best player at the Final table (probably the worst), but his heart is in the right place.

If nothing else, at least we don't have to hear any more about Jamie Gold!

[Invigilator]

I have to see more about the "God" stuff as I have been out a lot an have not seen much coverage.

Having some (professional) experience with people all over this spectrum, it is sometimes hard to distinguish between those people who believe God helps them in terms of personal fortitude and courage, and those who believe God intervenes in daily events to swing things their way. If it is the second one, then that's collusion on a grand scale and the WSOP and the Vatican should look into it.

[Talking Poker]

Baby steps, Kurn, baby steps.

[MAYHEM45]

The guy is fucking looney toons, plain and simple. Show them your power lord!

[Reel Deal]

Kinda like Bill Frist?

[Kurn]

So what? He's absolutely great for poker. Nice counterpoint to the fundies who want to shut us down.

[Kurn]

The Frank bill is not baby steps. It is legalizing internet gambling in the US. That is a huge step.

Let's not penalize the very people we want to attract to the game.

There's a thread on 2+2 with a guy who made $10,000 on wins of $180,000 and losses of $170,000. Do we really think he deserves $180,000 added to his AGI for $10,000 in actual income?

If it's going to get done, let's get it right.

[Talking Poker]

Of course not - and I personally struggle with this exact problem every year. But you're confusing the legality of online poker with Federal Tax codes. I don't ee why it has to be all or nothing. Just introduce a new bill to update/fix the tax codes (which really have nothing to do with online gambling anyway - they apply to B&M play already).

[Kurn]

You're right, of course, and I'm not arguing with you.

I just think we're not paying enough attention to the short-term impact the tax code will have on the game.

The reality is this:

If the unnamed player above made his money at a B&M and just put the net on his return and payed his taxes, the IRS would say thank you and move on. Why? No paper trail. And you know, there'd be nothing ethically wrong with reporting the net, despite the rules.

Once the specter of cyber-reporting is introduced, the natural mechanism for correcting the injustice goes away.

I'm harping on this because people will get screwed.

Not to get all G. Gordon Liddy on you, but this is an obvious example of malum prohibitum vs. malum in se

Its all academic anyway, as the Frank bill will not pass.